 | 'The only plausible solution is for a strong SNP to set itself the goal of forming a government
after the 2007 Holyrood elections. And there is only one credible figure in the SNP who can
deliver that. Alex Salmond, Scotland calls.' George Kerevan, 5 th July 2004. |  |
THE current mood inside the SNP camp is not unlike that in the tents of Bonnie Prince Charlie
before Culloden. The cause is great, the troops will happily die fighting for it, but there is an
ominous lack of leadership in the ranks, spelling impending doom. The gentlemanly John
Swinney, true to his bank-manager image, has resigned before the men in grey kilts called with
his P45. Perhaps he quit too early, undermined by a lunatic fringe he was too nice to see off.
As for his replacements, they do not inspire the SNP faithful, so why should they inspire the
rest of us? Roseanna Cunningham on form could easily have been Scotland's first female first
minister. Clever, articulate and sexy, she wowed the farmers in Perthshire and once could have
stolen female votes from central belt Labour by the sackful. But Rosie has been rendered
inarticulate by the Holyrood committee system, while her anachronistic left-wing views are too
far from the centre ground needed to run Scotland.
Nicola Sturgeon is a bundle of energy, but her humourless personality does not win votes in a
television democracy. And Mike Russell is only in the race to remind folk he is still alive.
Which is why, across the land, after the second or third dram, the SNP rank-and-file can be
heard muttering: "If only Alex would come back." Indeed, why shouldn't Alex Salmond,
former SNP leader and still king across the water at Westminster, not return to save the day?
Far-fetched? Let's examine the pros and cons of Alex Mark II.
On the plus side, Salmond as leader would bring the political savvy, communications skills and
killer instinct that would reduce Jack McConnell's lacklustre ministerial team to mincemeat.
That is not being gratuitous. One of the principal weaknesses of Holyrood has been the lack of
a weighty opposition. Democracy demands that the Executive is held to better account, or the
current opportunist Labour-Lib Dem lash-up will be in power for ever.
Alex Salmond is that rare political breed who is both brilliant in face-to-face debate in the
old-fashioned sense, but also a television natural, dripping soundbites. He can be a mite too
arrogant and cheeky, but everyone takes him seriously (a commodity missing in the Executive
since Henry McLeish went AWOL).
With Salmond back at the helm, the SNP's rank-and-file would recover their fighting spirit.
Better still, Salmond is a master at maintaining order in the fractious Nationalist ranks. United
only around the political goal of independence, the Nats have little internal ideological
coherence and are historical prey to personality cults. Salmond swam in these shark-infested
waters with consummate political ease. He always led from in front, constantly staying one step
ahead of his potential detractors. John Swinney, on the other hand, was often led by events.
Salmond also ran a tight ship through his lieutenants, such as Andrew Wilson and Mike
Russell. The latter was a backroom Mr Fixit, busily organising pro-Salmond slates at local level
and taking the flak for central-office intervention. As a result of being Salmond's Peter
Mandelson, Russell was never much liked by any of the SNP rank, which perhaps explains
their stupid decision effectively to deselect him as an MSP last year. Russell's chances of
winning the leadership himself are zero, but he is gambling that standing will keep his profile
high enough to find his way back to Holyrood.
What are the downsides of a Salmond revival? The SNP's critics would howl that it proves
their contention the party is a one-man band. Well, so is Scottish Labour under Jack
McConnell, but in a straight shoot-out at the OK Corral, I know who I'd bet on to be the last
man standing - and it isn't the man in the funny kilt.
More seriously, there would be the barb that a Salmond coup at this late stage would come
across as misogynist. To derail the leadership candidatures of the SNP's two leading women is
to risk a backlash among female voters, who are, anyway, historically less committed to the
Nationalist cause than are men.
The other argument against a triumphant return of Wee Eck is that it would merely paper over
the main problem the SNP faces - a crisis of political direction. The fundies, such as the
semi-detached and wholly unlamented Campbell Martin, MSP, believe that if only the SNP
waved the Saltire hard enough, the voters would see sense.
Alas, the SNP has come nowhere near getting 50 per cent of the electorate, even in the
Nationalist high tide of 1974.
Building an electoral majority for anything, and especially a risky social and economic
revolution involving separation from the rest of the UK, means satisfying several basic criteria.
The leadership group proposing the change has to be trusted across the political spectrum. That
won't happen till the SNP has proved itself in government - and certainly not if the SNP's
bampots keeping tearing the party apart.
Constructing a working majority for constitutional change also means satisfying various interest
groups. In other words, it is politics on the margin and not the big-bang theory of the fundies.
No modern western nation ever won independence unless its conservative business class was
in favour, or at least neutral. That was true in Norway and Ireland, while the Quebec and
Catalan nationalist movements have always been a bourgeois and petty bourgeois affair. But the
SNP has done everything it could to alienate the centre-right. It is also highly significant that the
three declared SNP leadership contenders have no new policy ideas to fill a cigarette paper.
However, all of the above is pie in the sky unless Alex Salmond himself wants to pick up the
poisoned chalice for a second time. Currently, the indications are that he does not. He quit the
SNP leadership originally, not due to any dark secrets in the closet, but because he just needed
a new life after years in a thankless and ill-paid job, seven days a week, not to mention
suffering a recurrent back pain. If anything, a second round of the SNP leadership is something
he needs like a hole in the head.
So let me put the case direct to Alex himself. The devolution referendum would not have been
won so convincingly had Alex Salmond not approached it in a bipartisan spirit. But now the
Scottish Parliament is falling into disrepute, such that barely half the electorate can be bothered
to vote. The reason for this wretched state of affairs is that Holyrood is being run by a bunch of
Labour local councillors who spend taxpayers' money like water, take responsibility for
nothing, and miss parliamentary scrutiny because they are eating a pie in the canteen. This is
not what home rulers like Keir Hardie and James Maxton expected, never mind the Nationalist
camp.
The issue now is not independence; it is maintaining the credibility of Scottish democracy. If
the Labour Executive destroys Holyrood as the voice of the Scottish people, the result will not
be a stampede towards independence, but a wholesale popular retreat from democratic politics
as a way of running society.
The only plausible solution is for a strong SNP to set itself the goal of forming a government
after the 2007 Holyrood elections. And there is only one credible figure in the SNP who can
deliver that. Alex Salmond, Scotland calls.
Return to home page